Reblogged:Kagan's Darkest Fears Realized

Recommended Posts

George Will discusses the much-needed recent reversal by the Supreme Court of a 1977 decision that had allowed public sector unions to garnish partial dues from non-union public sector employees. Among other things, Will notes the following revealing passage from Elena Kagan's dissenting opinion:

There is no sugarcoating today's opinion. The majority overthrows a decision entrenched in this nation's law -- and in its economic life -- for over 40 years. As a result, it prevents the American people, acting through their state and local officials, from making important choices about workplace governance. And it does so by weaponizing the First Amendment, in a way that unleashes judges, now and in the future, to intervene in economic and regulatory policy.

Will's commentary on this is amusing and informative, to say the least, and he is quite correct in his conclusion:

There is no sugarcoating today's reality. Public-sector unions are conveyor belts that move a portion of government employees' salaries -- some of the amount paid in union dues -- into political campaigns, almost always Democrats', to elect the people with whom the unions "negotiate" for taxpayers' money. Progressives who are theatrically distraught about there being "too much money in politics" are now theatrically distraught that the court has ended coercing contributions that have flowed to progressive candidates.

I can fault Will only for not going far enough -- not questioning the propriety of taxation or of the government performing some of the functions that so many government employees enable it to perform. But this ruling might make it a bit easier for the rare candidate (so far) who does to be heard, and to be elected.

The Supreme Court may have blown it on internet sales taxes, but at least it got this more important decision right.